June 21, 2012

Mitt Romney promised Latino leaders a long-term fix for immigration policy and short-term relief for immigrants in a speech Thursday that was notably softer in tone than when he was battling to win the Republican presidential nomination.

In a calibrated attempt to attract Latino voters without alienating some in his own party, Mr. Romney spoke of bipartisan solutions he would pursue as president. He pledged ... to let those with advanced degrees remain in the U.S. ...

Now, that's some brilliant politicking, Mitt: With your speech to Latino leaders today, you've definitely picked up some of that crucial voting bloc of Hispanic American citizens who are closely related to illegal immigrants with advanced degrees. You just keep listening to what the WSJ and NYT tell you and you can't go wrong.

109 comments:

Geez, every time Obummer does something stupid (which happens a lot) I'm ready to punch it for Romney, but then I read something like this (which happens a lot as well) and I think I'd rather stay at home while the world burns.

Fascinating, Captain. This alien "Romney" says he is running for President, but does not even try to appeal to voters! He runs the same campaign as "McCain" ran four years ago, against the same opponent, even though experience should have taught him it was futile. If the Prime Directive did not forbid it, we could tell "Romney" to offer voters something different from what "Obama" offers them-- it is apparent that voters are not interested in electing "Obama-lite." Alas for "Romney," destined to be less than a footnote in Galactic history.

Romney cut his chops in private equity - where you raise money or saddle a company with debt to take it over, and then layoff large swathes of the employees, sell off parts of the company, replace them with cheaper labor, break apart the company, etc. It's just like population replacement.

Wouldn't it be great for once if a candidate refused to speak to some Hispanic/Latino/Mestizo/Lucha Libre organization? I live in Florida and I am so sick of these groups, the sniveling liberal journalists that drone on about the "needs of Latinos", and how our politicians have to address them. What exactly are these needs? Burritos? Empanadas?

lol. The Hispanics who would vote for Romney have been here legally for a generation or two. Hispanics with advanced degrees mark "white" on their census forms, unless they work in academia, in which case it's worth their while to mark "Hispanic." (I do it!) I second Anonymous: he's showing his cards to Big Business: "I'll make enough Amerindians feel at home to keep wages low in your industry."

The real unemployment rate is much higher than 8.1%. Many people have dropped out, are working temp jobs, or are going on SS Disability. Shadow-stats does a good job of highlighting how the official stats cannot be trusted, inflation being one of the main ones.

It's a lose lose either way. Romney in my eyes has become scum now that I know that he actively anti protested the people protesting the Vietnam war, while avoiding the war himself using BS mormon missionary trips.

I don't care if you actively avoided going to war during the draft, I understand that. But doing that while egging the war on just screams chicken hawk to me. And America cannot deal with another useless war.

Maybe he was thinking of northern California's Sergio C. Garcia, JD holder having encountered a minor stumbling block on his way to admission by that state's bar association. We could use more volunteers around here to chase the ambulances Americans won't chase.

Steve, believe it or not, while Americans grunt and groan about our porous borders, they turn to jello over stories of kids brought here young by grandparents or parents and who are now 18, have diplomas, or serving in the military.

Romney knows Americans hate to be known as cruel and can't stand visions of the rest of the world seeing us deport kids.

That's just the way it is. His speech was directed at the general voting public.

This Diversity crap seems largely to me to be a open pit of alligators that Romney would do best to dance around.

This is not an easy call for Romney, is it? What voters are still in play and can be swayed to vote for Romney? I not very clear on this myself.

My guess is that the voters who can be swayed are those who voted for Obama out of anger at the Republicans over the bank mess of 2008. They voted for "anybody but the Republicans." Obama was, at least, not apparently implicated in the disaster.

Obama has proved himself to be incompetent and corrupt. Those voters who voted to kick out the Republicans in 2008 might be ready to desert Obama... but what is it that will induce them to do that?

My guess... a demonstration of competence and the hope for minimal corruption.

"Now, that's some brilliant politicking, Mitt: With your speech to Latino leaders today, you've definitely picked up some of that crucial voting bloc of Hispanic American citizens who are closely related to illegal immigrants with advanced degrees. "

-Yup, and while he's upped his votes from this crucial bloc of historically absent voters drawn from a minority population, he's jeopardized it with the massive bloc of white voters. Sort of a reverse Sailer voting strategy.

Then again, what choice does he have, when the liberal media will smear him as a rabid Nazi if he does anything other than kowtow to their views on immigration?

I don't like it any more than anyone else, but Romney is signaling he's "acceptable" and won't challenge the elite.

He has not been shy about attacking Obama at every turn, and playing tit for tat with him. But my guess is this one signal to the elite that he won't challenge seriously globalism, etc.

No candidate can run a populist, nationalist campaign. That's not possible, among other things a majority of the population according to Bloomberg's latest poll, 67%, approves of Obama's Amnesty. We call these people women, mostly.

The whole point of Romney's campaign is to WIN. Contrary to most here, populism and nationalism are generally losers. Tancredo never did much with it. It provided a floor but more significantly a ceiling to Ron Paul. That Bloomberg poll is probably suspect, but not by I think that much (my guess is more like 55% approve of Obama's Amnesty/Open Borders).

Sure Romney could blast the immigration policies of Obama and promise a heaping helping of populism and nationalism. And lose, big time. Women ... HATE HATE HATE that stuff. Like a Star Trek convention packed with Ron Paul supporters. His signaling is designed to prevent a scorched earth campaign by the elites.

What matters is what policies are enacted, not what campaign promises are made. The Tea Party and grass roots reformers have to be keep the pressure on, but realize their limits. An overwhelming majority of White women in the middle and working class side with illegals. They don't see a threat to them, "racism" of the ugly Beta White male not "sexy" Black Panther variety, and opportunities to be as Steve noted "Nice White Ladies" teaching at some inner city school, sprinkling the magic dust of their moral standing on Hispanic kids.

And Anon at 6:24 nailed it. Romney needs about $1 billion or more from Business PACs to fight Obama's haul. THEY want as cheap wages for professionals as possible.

If unemployment mattered, Obama would have been impeached by now. White guys don't matter because women just don't like most of them.

"Fascinating, Captain. This alien "Romney" says he is running for President, but does not even try to appeal to voters! He runs the same campaign as "McCain" ran four years ago, against the same opponent, even though experience should have taught him it was futile. If the Prime Directive did not forbid it, we could tell "Romney" to offer voters something different from what "Obama" offers them-- it is apparent that voters are not interested in electing "Obama-lite." Alas for "Romney," destined to be less than a footnote in Galactic history."

The fact that Romney had already gotten a great deal of support from wealthy Jews is a sure sign that they see him as safe on immigration. Jews have a long record of supporting liberal social issues within the Republican Party, and in at least one area, gay marriage, Jewish Republicans seem at least as interested in social issues as they are in Israel. As John Graham pointed out (“New York Gay Marriage: Follow the Jewish Money”), wealthy Republican Jews have pushed gay marriage (here’s a recent example involving New York Hedge fund operator, Paul Singer (“SuperDonor backs Romney—and Gay Marriage“).

So don’t expect much from Romney on immigration. He wouldn’t be where he is if his liberal [Edit: and conservative] Jewish donors believed that he would be seriously anti-immigration.

As a Computer Programmer I am tired of hearing Mitt say he wants to give every foreigner with an advanced degree a green card. This reminds me that former NYC Mayor Ed Koch said during the Republican primary that the only 2 candidates he could support were "the two Mormons." That sums it up for me. Being a Mormon, Romney sees himself as a Minority and much more easily identifies with Asian IT graduate students than he identifies with WASP's like me. That's why he is so comfortable delivering Tom Friedman NY Times op-ed page lines about handing out green cards to foreign (mainly Asian) graduates in IT and praises them as being "best and brightest." Regardless of economics I'd vote for FDR over either Obama or Romney any day of the week. At least he was pro-WASP.

"Since there is no real difference between Obama and Romney, does it really matter?"

If voting was important, they wouldn't let us do it. We're choosing mascots, and I prefer Romney as our mascot, and not just because he looks more like me. He's less pretentious, more upbeat, less of a narcissist, seems like a nicer guy. I remember a news story about one of Obama's half-brothers living in a dumpster. It's hard to imagine a guy like Romney letting something like that happen to a blood relative.

Romney vetoed tuition discounts for illegals in MASSACHUSETTS. That suggests at least a modicum of realism about immigration. My guess is this is him appealing to guilt-ridden whites without promising amnesty to anyone but a small slice of immigrants with high human capital.

From Steve's perspective, why would it be a bad thing that his pander is so narrowly tailored?

"Face it Steve, we are where we are, because 60% of White America is fucking stupid - and always has been."

Actually, Whites built great civilizations because of our Empathy Quotient (EQ) (Avg>125) is much higher than Latinos (Avg<70), Blacks (Avg<40), and Asians (Avg<10). It's also our Achilles Heel and allows other races to take advantage of our good will.

You just keep listening to what the WSJ and NYT tell you and you can't go wrong.

Well, if he does at least he won't be called "anti-immigrant", a xenophobe, a nativist, or a racist. Which is important if you want to be President. Especially if you are trying to unseat America's first President of Color.

I could understand if Romney were just lying through his teeth to earn the contributions of the billionaires' club and the votes of Latinos. But nothing in Romney's personal or political history suggests that he much gives a shit about this country being overrun by Third World peasants, or the effect their presence has on the native middle class and the neighborhoods they have to live in, or the burden on the government of caring for so many illiterates.

He was happy to keep hiring illegals to mow his lawn, until the press noticed. He waited until the very last days of his governorship to enact local immigration enforcement, which was promptly overturned by his successor. The Mormon Church hierarchy has not officially endorsed amnesty, but they have done so in all but name, and lies to cover its ass with its members. Utah is the most illegal alien-friendly Republican state in the nation. Former Utah Gov. Mike Leavitt, who oversaw most of that, including in-state tuition and driver's licenses for illegals, now has a major role in the Romney campaign. Leavitt was also working to gut the state convention system that enabled Republicans to kick out long-term establishment pol Sen. Bob Bennett back in 2010.

Romney's whole history is as a businessman who views labor as fungible, who has never worked a day of physical labor in his life (nor has Obama, of course), and who views labor as a fungible commodity. If during his presidency he doubled the country's GNP but the bottom half of the population fell into abject serfdom nothing in his character suggests he'd give a shit, or regard his tenure as a failure.

Honestly I don't know what's going to happen to the USA. Something tells me that by 2016 the demographic replacement of whites will be complete enough that serious immigration form (i.e., enfiorcement and reduced legal immigration) will be impossible. We're well on our way to insolvency. Experience in Greece and in the auto industry suggets that people would sooner watch the country or industry go broke than accept the need for real reform. Latino citizens would rather watch this country slip into Third World status than admit that more immigration of their kind is largely the cause.

We're either finished, or slipping into long centuries of decline and irrelevance. Stop obsessing too much about it, and go have more kids. Raise them to think for themselves. Protect them from the cultural rot. Stop contributing to churches and charities that undermine this country's historic white majority.

The leader of Mitt Romney's transition team (and thus the man most likely to be his chief-of-staff) is former Utah Governor Mike Leavitt. Like Romney, Leavitt comes from a rich, powerful Mormon family. Like Romney, Leavitt avoided military service during Vietnam.

As the governor of Utah, Leavitt signed into law a bill giving driver's licenses to illegal aliens. He then signed into law another bill giving illegal aliens in-state tuition at public universities and colleges. He opposed at every turn efforts to enact state enforcement programs. In 2010 establishment, pro-amnesty incumbent Bob Bennett was defeated at the Utah GOP convention, losing the GOP senate nomination. In Utah conventions the number of primary candidates is narrowed down to at most two. Bennett finished third. Leavitt immediately went to work trying to alter the convention process in order to protect rich incumbents by giving them a way to do an end-run around the system.

This is the kind of man Romney hangs with. This is the kind of politician who will be calling the shots in a Romney Administration.

People with mortgages and debts will be scared of losing their jobs and defaulting and going bankrupt. They will be reluctant to ask for raises and will tend to avoid causing trouble at work. They will accept lower wages or whatever they can get in order to pay their mortgages and debts. Also, by devoting a substantial fraction of income to mortgage payments and debt service, people will have less to spend on goods & services, lowering inflationary pressure.

The LDS church seems to have reached saturation point among European-Americans. Very hard to find new converts. Mexican and Central Americans have been their best "customer base" for a while now. The Catholic church is in a similar situation. Both these religious organizations have a vested interest in more immigrants.

"Since there is no real difference between Obama and Romney, does it really matter?

The elites are simply playing charades."

- I would've guessed musical chairs, but that's just me.

I picture young Barack as a secret D&D buff, probably played it all the time until he got onboard with the whole 'I gotta be black and distance myself from all things white' at which time he 'dropped it like its hot' and switched to the past-time of community organizing. Its funny he's had to do a 180 and try to overemphasize white pasttimes in recent years like playing golf so much to try to connect with white voters. I'll let in a million illegals, allow the Black Panthers to intimidate whites not to vote and ramp up AA, pay no attention to that stuff whitey, 'cuz see, I'm one of you since I golf!

"Actually, Whites built great civilizations because our Empathy Quotient (EQ) (Avg>125) is much higher than Latinos (Avg<70), Blacks (Avg<40), and Asians (Avg<10). It's also our Achilles Heel and allows other races to take advantage of our good will."

That's interesting. Where did you get those figures? So you're saying that empathy causes a survival advantage but only when it's extended outward to a genetically related group and if you have too much empathy you'll extend it outwards to other groups with the unintended result that you'll benefit them at the expense of your own group, thus hurting your own group?

The Bloomberg poll was slanted as hell and also called an almost 20 point lead for Obama, which immediately makes it spurious.

Whiskey goes off on white women to deflect criticisms of the Scots Irish who are busy kicking the third world out of thier country while telling us to accept more dregs from around the world. The fact is many people think of hispanics and think of taco shops. Those living on the southwest border have a much more realistic view of what amnesty and open borders mean (16 year olds driving dope loads crashing and burning while trying to escape from the Border Patrol like what happened im Casa Grande recently). The fact is that the US has already ceded everything south of the I 8 to the cartels, and the small to medium towns along the border are turning into small scale conflicts.

I was originally furious enough at Obama to vote Romney. Now the question is why should I?

Regarding Shadow Stats. Yes, they have U-6 (which includes people actively looking and also discouraged workers) at around 23% while the government has U-6 at close to 14%. The government’s U-3 figure of 8.1% is just baloney designed not to encourage hysteria or panic.

Regarding the Bloomberg poll showing 64% of the public support Obama’s amnesty. On the same day they had a poll showing Obama leading Romney by 13%. Since this poll is wildly inconsistent with virtually every other poll (which usually shows them neck in neck) even MSM commentators noticed that it was an outlier. Apparently, Bloomberg only polls his plutocratic billionaire friends on the Upper East Side of Manhattan. My guess is that 64 % actually oppose it (maybe slightly higher or lower) judging from the comments on the MSM web sites I have read. This would also be consistent with the many polls showing 70% of the public want to curtail immigration. I think the Bloomberg poll is a transparent attempt at shaping public opinion by getting the message (hey everybody is in favor of it don’t be a weirdo) out first and framing the narrative in order to create a band wagon effect.

Regarding Romney’s ties to pro immigrant Mormon’s like Leavitt, etc… Yeah, on the one hand Mitt did veto instate tuition for illegals when he was governor of Massachusetts, and made some remarks during the primary that suggested he might be tougher on border enforcement. But certainly, given his friends, he is no anti-immigrant warrior. And as other posters pointed out he doesn’t want to alienate potential voters or donors anyways.

Regarding whether to sit this election out. Personally, I wonder if that much will change if Romney is elected (we are so in debt a lot of our bullets have been spent). On the positive side, he does have a history of getting results and he would be unlikely to appoint Supreme Court justices like Sotomayer or Kagan who are career Diversity bureaucrats inimical to White interests (and also hostile to some other things like free speech and freedom of association, etc..) . Also with Romney we won’t (I hope) have the DOJ conducting a six month investigation and writing a five hundred page report on whether Omar Thornton was justified by White racism when he killed nine White people in Connecticut (thankfully, they concluded he wasn’t!).

Regarding whether it is time (or past time) to give up on the U.S. At least since Clinton (NAFTA, GATT, repeal of Glass-Steagall, etc...) the PTP have been extremely anti White American middle class (not just a little). The future doesn’t look particularly good either.

Isn't the fact that immigration-generated lower wages are inevitable if jobs are to stay in the U.S.? Our edge in productivity-per-worker is less and less a comparative advantage as services as well as manufacturing become more highly-automated.

There was an interesting Time magazine article about the Romneys a couple of weeks ago. They were the original RINOs and and judging by Mittens' track record as gov of Massachusetts he is definately cut from the same cloth.

Oh well, sitting out another election as expected

No candidate can run a populist, nationalist campaign. That's not possible, among other things a majority of the population according to Bloomberg's latest poll, 67%, approves of Obama's Amnesty. We call these people women, mostly.

The whole point of Romney's campaign is to WIN. Contrary to most here, populism and nationalism are generally losers. Tancredo never did much with it.

You're a moron. Romney won the Republican primary by appearing tough on immigration.

The leader of Mitt Romney's transition team (and thus the man most likely to be his chief-of-staff) is former Utah Governor Mike Leavitt. Like Romney, Leavitt comes from a rich, powerful Mormon family. Like Romney, Leavitt avoided military service during Vietnam."

Romney also chose, as his chief foreign policy advisor, an openly gay republican party hack. Why would he do that? There are any number of "policy experts" he could have drawn on. Given that they really don't know very much or have any practical experience, such people are a dime-a-dozen. I'm sure he could have found an equally unqualified beltway parasite who happened to be straight. By choosing an outed gay, however, Romney was signalling (as one now says) that he's cool with the gay agenda. Just as he is now signalling that he is on board with the Bush/McCain/Obama position on immigration.

George Bush's main fault was that he was too nice. He couldn't fire anyone. He spent mental and moral effort to help the poor and minorities. Pointless foolishness.

Romney has sent signals, if you pay attention, that he is not that nice. This makes sense he was a corporate turn around guy. He had to let lots of people go for the greater good.

He is a tough guy - not as tough as me perhaps but still tough. I was more of a corporate hatchet man. I fired and reorganized work forces in government and business. I was never a CEO - except for a couple very small organizations. I was the kind of guy that a CEO type like Romney would have hired to meet with those being layed off. I sat across the table from them and gave them the bad news. Some fumed, some cried, some challenged me to a fist fight. Sometimes I felt bad but not often. I also spent a lot of time hiring people. On balance firing is more important than hiring in most organizations - certainly in government.

What was my technique to survive in an organization with such a nasty personal mission? I always tried to be super nice and ultra fair. I cultivated a compassionate persona. I gave fresh flowers to all the women. I made sappy speeches.

That looks to me like what Romney is doing here. Unless I miss my bet he's laying the ground work for giving unions and minorities a haircut. Remember how likable Reagan was? Remember his actions with the Air Traffic controllers? Just as only Nixon could go to China, only a really nice guy could get away with cutting them off at the knees.

There's a lot riding on Romney and his basic toughness. I think he's saying whatever he has to to the Mexicans. He's trying to put them to sleep. I'm not sure illegal aliens are a big enough problem for him to even bother with. He may just focus on cutting civil servants and regulations. But if he's elected and he chooses to do something about the border - what candidate of either party would be tougher? He I'm afraid is our last best hope.

As anonymous noted, if voting really mattered, they wouldn't let us do it. I'm with Evil Sandmich -I'm done picking between dumb and dumber. I'm staying home - and the world is already burning, anyhow. Voting won't effect the fire in the least.

Regarding whether it is time (or past time) to give up on the U.S. At least since Clinton (NAFTA, GATT, repeal of Glass-Steagall, etc...) the PTP have been extremely anti White American middle class (not just a little). The future doesn’t look particularly good either.

Agreed. It's sort of a late-Roman-republic strategy in which the elites use the mob to keep themselves in power and screw everybody in between.

Vote Romney because he's white, it's as simple as that. In the eyes of the world, the United States is even now a $500,000 Ferrari and the President of the United States is the prick behind the wheel with a hot chick in the passenger seat. Whites built the Ferrari (if it wasn't for minorities it'd be a Bugatti Veyron) and thus a white man should by all rights be in the drivers seat. Policy wise an Obama and a Romney may be identical, but at least with Romney the world is not looking in awe at a black as the "Most Powerful Man in the World."

Dubya always wanted to believe the best about people - that we really could have a gubmint edumakashun system wherein no child was left behind, that there really was such a thing as moderate Islam, that all those little brown ones really would pay off their Fannie/Freddie sand-state mortgages, that the Scots-Irish at the NY MacTimes really did want what was best for AmeriKKKa, that Hank Paulson was being honest about TARP, etc etc etc...

***************

That looks to me like what Romney is doing here.

Yeah, if the worst that Romney has promised is to help the illegals WHO HAVE ADVANCED DEGREES, then - seriously - who are we talking about here?

A young John Derbyshire during a brief period [back in the 1970s?] when his INS paperwork wasn't completely up-to-date?

I was going to suck it up and vote for the guy because he seems like an old-fashioned type who predominated in a the US before the 1960's and because his immigration stance during the primaries wasn't total weak sauce. But he supports the NDAA, TSA naked body scans at airports, and US Troops fighting proxy wars on Israel's behalf. Now he is canoodling up to the Hispanics and courting open borders Marco Rubio as his VP choice. He just lost my vote and lots of others as well. Good luck with that Hispanic coalition.

That looks to me like what Romney is doing here. Unless I miss my bet he's laying the ground work for giving unions and minorities a haircut. Remember how likable Reagan was? Remember his actions with the Air Traffic controllers? Just as only Nixon could go to China, only a really nice guy could get away with cutting them off at the knees.

Reagan was a disaster for the country economically.

The whole point of destroying unions is to pave the way for cheap labor.

Give me someone who's been a doer over someone who's been a talker any day of the week. I'll take my chances. Further, no Kagen or Sotomayor is likely to be appointed under Romney.

He can't tip his hand on lots of things or else the battering rams of the Dems and the sychophantic press would kill his chances.

As President, Romney knows what Paul Ryan knows--we have to get entitlements under control. That's the biggest threat right now, but he can't talk about that in big, bold strokes , which the press is demanding...of course they don't demand that kind of talk from Barry, or else he won't be elected. There really are senior citizens who, when pols speak of Medicare and Social Security, actually believe their checks will not come or that they will be reduced, even when all that's been said is that the retirement age needs to be increased and those in their 20s and 30s and 40s will be those whom changes affect.

Of course, the other looming and growing threat is Putin. Our inconsistency of policy in the Middle East (support for Libyan rebels but the running away from even strong moral support for Syrian being murdered) has left Russia feeling we are inconsequential and they are feeling quite emboldened.

Europe sees us as impotent.

As an aside, the only Euro leader I respect is Merkel, and I'd much rather a Romney-Merkel conference take place over an Obama-Merkel one any time.

Seems to me that Germans and working, middle class Americans have a lot in common today. We've grown aware of the parasitism of others and we've come to see that those parasites have gained power through their sheer numbers.

Politician play to power. There are three kinds of power: financial, media, and vocal.

Wall Street has financial power. Media have power of information and opinions. Blacks, illegals, and gays have Vocal power, which exaggerates their real power.

White conservatives are big in number but not as big as they used to be. As their numbers decline, they must boost their power in terms of financial power, media power, and vocal power to compensate for the loss in demographic power. But to win financially in the NWO, one has to be globalist. To control media, one has to be morally confident and intellectually aggressive, which are lacking on the Right whose two mantras are low taxes for Rich and Creationism. To have vocal power, there needs to be confidence and morale, which are also lacking on the right.

Since Romney has to play to power, he has to play to Jews and globalists. As for morality and social power, he doesn't pander to white conservatives since white conservatives lack media and vocal power. Gays march. Illegals march. But whites don't march. No vocal power. The only thing they marched for was 'smaller government' with the Tea Party, which isn't very passionate as an issue. Not as passionate as issues of race and group identity, which are what blacks and gays go for. But with the cult of MLK pushed by Jewish media, even white conservatives think their main objective must be win over 'people of color'. And since Romney isn't allowed to touch issues such as race, he only goes for economic issues but it boils down to 'no tax cuts for the rich'.

But Sailer won't touch on certain issues out of fear of certain power groups too. Why won't he introduce the need for affirmative action against Jews in favor of white gentiles? Jews push affirmative action against white gentiles in favor of blacks and illegals. Why not fight back? Sailer fears Jewish power.

Any white rightist who won't stand up to Jewish power isn't really real.Just look at the Democratic Party. 65% of funds come from Jews, 15% comes from gays. So, 80% of its funds come from two groups who together make up 4% of the population. They have real power and all cower before that power.

And if you go to facebook and check out the popularity of political pages, huffington has 600,000 subscribers, Jezebel has 120,000 subscribers, Slate has 100,000s, Rachel Maddow has 100,000s, NY Times has 2 million subscribers...

but Takimag has a measly 1500 subscribers, Alternative Right has 1000 subscribers. The 'conservative' facebook page with most subscribers is the neocon Weekly Standard with 120,000 subscribers. NR has 22,000 subscribers.

The higher unemployment, the more this forces down wages. Conversely, if there are plenty jobs available and unemployment is low, this tends to raise wages - in that case workers are able to change jobs rapidly to get better pay.

"Seems to me that Germans and working, middle class Americans have a lot in common today."

yeah - because they're both german. a lot of them, anyway. biggest ethnic group in the US. at least until the deliberate mexican invasion. somehow it is totally overlooked that the US is the way it is pretty much because the english and germans built it and were by far the two biggest ethnic groups, and not because of some romantic melting pot story.

everybody acts like it's totally a given and a sure thing that random people can come to the US and re-create, extend, and build on what was already created, because "that's how it happened in the past". completely unexamined is the truth about who did most of the building and creating. two of the most important ethnic groups in europe. they dominated europe and created empires out of nothing. it's not magic or a mystery why they do that everywhere they go, and other groups just create disorder and slums.

oh, some in the HBD sphere like to go on and on about how ashkenazi jews created every good thing that ever existed, and will cogitate and marvel over that narrative for years. "They left Europe and Europe died, then they came to America and created every important thing there, too." last time i checked there were no jews in germany, and germany has returned to it's, perhaps natural, complete dominance and control over all of europe.

another thing that is funny is how the liberals go on and on about how "we need to make our schools better". they even, finally, started to note the difference beteween nations on those PISA scores, and are now running this commercial on US television, where they show every nation that scores above the US on those tests. it's like 15 countries. it's a long list.

the liberals say, hey, we need to be more like south korea and finland!

i can't be the only one who noticed that mexico was NOT one of the countries scoring above the US on the PISA tests. yet, immediately after going into their "let's improve the schools by being more like south korea and finland" sales pitch, the liberals turn and around and ram more...mexicans into US schools.

The whole point of destroying unions is to pave the way for cheap labor.

Reagan also granted amnesty to illegals and increased legal immigration, but don't expect too many people at a conservative site like this to acknowledge this fact about their hero Ronnie. Just keep blaming "the left, the left, the left..." and keep making excuses for the Republicans. I'm sure Reagan had good intentions and couldn't possibly have foreseen the consequences of his actions.

Stay home? Please. Romney is only doing what he has to as a politician. For a career flipflopper, immigration is one issue where he's been pretty consistent. He was conservative on it in Massachusetts (certainly more so than governors Perry and Huckabee in TX and AR). All he's doing now is trying to dance around Obama's amnesty. He's not supporting it. He's not taking back what he said about self-deportation during the primaries.

I would love nothing more than for Romney to attack this issue head-on, and appealing to white working class Americans instead of illegal Mexicans. But then the media would crush him, and he'd lose. So he comes out in favor of higher skilled immigration. It's better than lower sklled immigration.

In the end, Romney will NEVER put out a Bush-McCain style amnesty bill because he doesn't want one. He's not a Hispanderer like Bush. he's just riding this out before he changes the subject. He will appoint judges approved by conservatives and not fat lesbians. And if he doesn't, he will not be supported by conservatives in 2016. It's that simple. He's a smart man.

"He's really conservative,see, don't look at his past actions or public speeches see, its all part of his super-secret conservative game plan. I got it from a guy who knows the inside scoop who got it from a cousin of Mitt's former girlfriend's hairdresser."

"Whites built the Ferrari (if it wasn't for minorities it'd be a Bugatti Veyron) and thus a white man should by all rights be in the drivers seat."

No, whites DESIGNED the Ferrari (or Ford?). There's a good reason there are so many black people in cold-ass Detroit."

- And here I thought they came to Detroit to live under the benevolent and diversity-loving arm of ol' Henry Ford! In any case, they've certainly added their own personal touches to make it unmistakeably a vibrant 'chocolate city' !

Romney has sent signals, if you pay attention, that he is not that nice."

Here's a way he could send a signal that he is not that nice - he could openly state that he will not support an amnesty - ever. He would win a lot of white votes by doing so, too. Instead, he refused to even say that he would overturn Obama's recent (illegal) backdoor amnesty. That sends a signal too, namely that he is all for the population replacement policies of the global elites.

Anyway, I don't want a President who speaks in signals and code-words. I want somebody who will plainly state what he believes. Obviously there is no place in American public life for any such man today.

What's so good about lowering unemployment? Lowering unemployment can lead to inflation.

A relatively high unemployment rate means employees will accept lower wages and will be scared of losing their jobs and not ask for raises. This puts downward pressure on labor costs and prices.

The median male wage is exactly the same today - in inflation adjusted dollars - as it was in 1972. Meanwhile inflation has been high and continuous. So if keeping wages low is supposed to stave off inflation, it's not working.

The real inflation rate is much higher than the official one, because the official rate excludes things like energy and food. The cost of electricity and milk can double, as they have done in the last ten years, but this fails to show up in the official inflation rate.

"The main purpose of the bourgeois in relation to the worker is, of course, to have the commodity labour as cheaply as possible, which is only possible when the supply of this commodity is as large as possible in relation to the demand for it"

Capitalism is wonderfully adaptive. It's no coincidence that the position most beloved of the left is also that which is profitable to employers (in the short term at any rate).

"the liberals say, hey, we need to be more like south korea and finland!

i can't be the only one who noticed that mexico was NOT one of the countries scoring above the US on the PISA tests. yet, immediately after going into their "let's improve the schools by being more like south korea and finland" sales pitch, the liberals turn and around and ram more...mexicans into US schools.

wut?"

- That's because you guys aren't thinking like libs. To them, Korean or Mexican, they're the same- everyone has equal potential and is an interchangeable cog. Well, except for whites, who gave the world industrialization, the scientific method, modern medicine, etc. We couldn't possibly want the thriving society they built to remain- they're inveterate racists who are hopelessly evil so they've got to be replaced.

Orwell summed it up nicely, 'All animals are equal but some are more equal than others'

"Whites built the Ferrari (if it wasn't for minorities it'd be a Bugatti Veyron) and thus a white man should by all rights be in the drivers seat."

No, whites DESIGNED the Ferrari (or Ford?). There's a good reason there are so many black people in cold-ass Detroit."

- I agree, we certainly need to give blacks credit for taking the rusting wasteland that was Detroit of the 50s and 60s and turning it into the thriving, industrious crown jewel of the US that it is today. They even outsmarted the dumb ol' whites that live in the rest of US by creating the economic miracle where housing prices in Detroit are even lower today than they were in the 50s!

Jody wrote:"They left Europe and Europe died, then they came to America and created every important thing there, too." last time i checked there were no jews in germany, and germany has returned to it's, perhaps natural, complete dominance and control over all of europe.

That's an overstatement of the claims. First, Jews are small in numbers, so the number of non-Jewish geniuses will outpace the number of Jewish geniuses even if the percent of Jewish geniuses within the Jewish population is higher. As for Germany, it has done very well since the end of the War, but you should compare to the late 19th and early 20th century. At least in mathematics and the pure sciences, it was the nearly unrivalled academic powerhouse of Europe. That is no longer the case, although the country still performs very respectably. Germany has one of the highest average IQ's in Europe, so none of this is too surprising.

There are around 250,000 Jews in Germany currently, compared to ~500,000 before 1935 (about 1% of the population then). Most are recent emigres from the former Soviet Union.

The median male wage is exactly the same today - in inflation adjusted dollars - as it was in 1972. Meanwhile inflation has been high and continuous. So if keeping wages low is supposed to stave off inflation, it's not working.

No, we are not talking about basic addition. We are talking about your claim that higher wages = inflation.

That claim is moronic. Inflation means a very specific thing, and that very specific things is not "higher wages". It also is not "stuff getting more expensive".

Inflation is tied to the money supply (set by the government these days) and the amount of "stuff" which exists to be purchased with that money. It has nothing to do with the average wage level, any more than it has anything to do with the price of oil of wheat.

If because of a tight labor market you are required to pay somebody extra money to mow your lawn - you being far too fat and lazy to mow you own lawn - this is not "inflation" in action.

"Actually Romney is being clever here- the number of illegals with advanced degrees probably number 2 in total."

True. My state has given in-state tuition to illegal aliens for about a decade. A news report several years ago revealed that overhwelmingly (>95%) these students were attending our community colleges, not our universities. So they aren't going to be earning a lot of masters and doctorates, and the few who do aren't getting them in STEM fields or medicine.

The real problem is that we lack a lot of high profile politicians willing to make the case for across the board enforcement, which is why the public isn't embracing enforcement as a real issue. We have Jan Brewer and pretty much no one else.

Here's the Google Wallet FAQ. From it: "You will need to have (or sign up for) Google Wallet to send or receive money. If you have ever purchased anything on Google Play, then you most likely already have a Google Wallet. If you do not yet have a Google Wallet, don’t worry, the process is simple: go to wallet.google.com and follow the steps." You probably already have a Google ID and password, which Google Wallet uses, so signing up Wallet is pretty painless.

You can put money into your Google Wallet Balance from your bank account and send it with no service fee.

Google Wallet works from both a website and a smartphone app (Android and iPhone -- the Google Wallet app is currently available only in the U.S., but the Google Wallet website can be used in 160 countries).

Or, once you sign up with Google Wallet, you can simply send money via credit card, bank transfer, or Wallet Balance as an attachment from Google's free Gmail email service. Here'show to do it.

(Non-tax deductible.)

Fourth: if you have a Wells Fargo bank account, you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Wells Fargo SurePay. Just tell WF SurePay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). (Non-tax deductible.)

Fifth: if you have a Chase bank account (or, theoretically,other bank accounts), you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Chase QuickPay (FAQ). Just tell Chase QuickPay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address (steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). If Chase asks for the name on my account, it's Steven Sailer with an n at the end of Steven. (Non-tax deductible.)

My Book:

"Steve Sailer gives us the real Barack Obama, who turns out to be very, very different - and much more interesting - than the bland healer/uniter image stitched together out of whole cloth this past six years by Obama's packager, David Axelrod. Making heavy use of Obama's own writings, which he admires for their literary artistry, Sailer gives the deepest insights I have yet seen into Obama's lifelong obsession with 'race and inheritance,' and rounds off his brilliant character portrait with speculations on how Obama's personality might play out in the Presidency." - John Derbyshire Author, "Prime Obsession: Bernhard Riemann and the Greatest Unsolved Problem in Mathematics" Click on the image above to buy my book, a reader's guide to the new President's autobiography.